Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
That Seventies Issue - TRAINS
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH</i> <br /> <br />To futuremodal: Your plea for subsidized grain rates out of Montana and your rant against BNSF's so-called monopoly is starting to wear thin, especially when you place it in every thread imaginable. There may be many unanswered questions about MILW's retrenchment and since the clock can't be reversed, they will probably stay that way. The statute of limitations has long since expired if any criminal matters are involved. <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />C'mon, CSSHE, don't be so blatantly disingenuous regarding what I say. No one said anything about subsidizing grain rates out of Montana, rather we lament the fact that there is no real rail competition out of Montana since the retrenchment of Milwaukee. If what you are inferring is that the wish for the feds to mitigate the situation and provide the groundwork for a second Class I across the Norther Tier would somehow be a subsidy, you are wrong. Mitigation is not subsidy, and there is no statute of limitations on righting a wrong. <br /> <br />Unless you think that any government action that benefits one party to the detriment of another is a subsidy. If that's the case, then it can also be argued that the decision by the feds to allow the Milwaukee to pull up its tracks west of Miles City is a direct subsidy to BN/BNSF, since it allowed BN to basically double its grain moving charges, all other things being equal. No one at this time is saying that anything criminal occurred, rather misplaced regulatory action was taken that resulted in extreme hardship for these folks over the last two decades. <br /> <br />You can call it a rant or whatever term you need to help you alleviate your collective guilt over the situation, but the fact remains that the rates BNSF charges out of Montana are double what they should be given a truly competitive market. Logic dictates grain moving rates should be in the $20/mt range, not the $40/mt range. It doesn't take a rocket economist to know that this practice is monopolistic, cut and dried. When the profits from every third crop are going straight into BNSF's bank account, something is seriously amiss.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy